They attract a lot of hate online! So is it fair? 2nd Channel: / @drivingohm Website: www.ev-man.co.uk Tesla Referral: ts.la/andrew31112 Twitter: / evmanuk Octopus Referral: share.octopus.... #electriccars #suv #cars
I met one, I was driving a Ford Focus, on the back road from my mother's to my work. He stopped on the road in his Range Rover and pointed to the grass verge for me to drive into it. I got out my car and said I'm in no rush, either you drive in the grass verge or I'll sit here all day, I said to him that the verge on my side is soft mud and he still didn't drive into the verge on his side. I just sat in my car. Eventually after a few minutes he reversed back to a passing place.
People buy what they want and they use it how they want, that's the privilege of owning it, it's not up to you or me to tell people how to use the stuff they own, however it might annoy us
The best "SUV" I've ever had was a MK1 903cc Panda 4x4! Amazing in snow and that's why you still see so many in the Alps. I've had SJ's Vitara's, Rav's, HRV's, CRV's X3's and even an Octavia 4x4 estate. The Panda was the answer, light, small and skinny tyres that cut through the snow! The only thing that ever stopped the Panda was when it had driven itself onto a snow bank and it's wheels were no longer touching the floor. 2wd SUV's are a pointless waste, less aerodynamic and heavier than their hatchback equivalent.
Think there should be weight categories for how much we charge per mile. If i own 5 cars i cant drive 5 all the time so why should i pay the same road tax as someone who drives 20k miles per year however, at the same time i dont want people to be taxed into oblivion for commuting longer than most. Think theres a happy medium we could reach if the gov had their head screwed on properly
@@iCozzh if you own five cars you are inherently a wealthy car addict with more money than sense, so we should take as much money as we feel like from you, seeing as you waste it on nonsense things like owning five cars and are objectively a terrible human being. *shrugs*
@@jonevansauthor Wrong. What If i Own a van, a family car, a sports car , a mainly track focused car and a car im doing up for son? They could all be £2k shit boxes
@@jonevansauthor What an utterly degenerative comment “we should take as much money from you as possible as youre objectively a terrible human” how catastrophically dense can you get?
My mum has to drive a car that sits higher up as she finds it easier to get in and out of. There’s an older lady who lives next door to me who drives a Kia Sorento, which she obviously has as it’s easier to get in and out of. I have a Mini Cooper hatch 3 door and my mum finds it hard to get in and out of.
A TV reporter was interviewing a man sat in his car last week. The man was complaining about EVs, saying that they were the cause of so many deep potholes due to their weight. He was sat in a Range Rover 🙄
I think my Model 3 is a bit big to be honest. I’ve come from a staple diet of 2 Golfs and a Corsa. While driving a Model 3 is absolutely fine, even on single track roads, it’s parking that’s the problem. Fitting a model 3 into a marked bay at Tescos, especially when the car park is full, it’s tight, and I find myself squeezing out of the door. The Model Y is a good 10cm wider and longer by a few cm as well. I really wouldn’t want the hassle of a big car in a supermarket car park. So do they deserve abuse? Well if they double park, even by 1cm, they have denied someone else an otherwise empty parking space, so yes they deserve abuse! We managed perfectly fine in the 80’s fitting 3 kids into a Vauxhall Cavalier and going on holidays with it. The parking spaces are the same size now as they were back then, so we’ve got zero entitlement to bigger spaces and roads.
Or maybe car parking sizes are not fit for purpose. They've been getting smaller all the time, while the population is getting older (and unable to do the gymnastics to get in and out of the car)
Vehicle width is a real issue in Bristol, where the roads are so narrow. When we bought an EV I had a spreadsheet of vehicle width as well as length, weight and luggage room. Some things -the Buzz- are incredibly wide. There’s a deep irony for EVs: vehicle width increases air resistance. An electric estate car with same Cd, battery and motor efficiency would be expected to have more range than an SUV. Even wheel size can be a factor here. Maybe in future this’ll lead to an insurgence in estate cars -last year we were effectively given a choice if “which electric SUV do you want?” Ended up with a BMW iX1. I think we’d have got a polestar2 if it had enough rear headroom for a 6”1 son. Which of course is essentially a Volvo XC40 recharge
Whats wrong is that anyone thinks they have a right to say what some one elses drives. Nothing to do with me what anyone else drives, or if it does then should we question what everyone needs a car for, questions like do you have kids, do you have a job, do you need a car in your job, but life doesnt work like this. If you have £1mil then you can buy and run an SUV or lambo, and you get charged accordingly if you can only afford a little Citroën again you get charged accordinly. Its all about jealousy just because you don't like them and probably can't afford them. This is all thats wrong with this planet, we all started judging each other even thought we had the right to, we don't.
Of course what I drive affects other people - there are massive externalities involved with driving. Pollution, incidents leading to serious injury or death, noise, space taken up.
I waiting waiting at a roundabout in my Nissan Note, an SUV came up beside me and I couldn't see the oncoming cars on the roundabout because of the bonnet height. I was less than impressed with that. Surely the bonnets on them don't need to be as high as that.
The real SUVs are the huge American family cars based on pickup trucks, like Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban. Those are just too big in my book. And they are generally not safe for anyone, not even for the occupants.
We have a Kia Soul. It is very boxy but I don't think it is an SUV. We bought it because as creaky pensioners we find it easier to get in and out. I would love a Tesla or a BYD but my body says no!
Surely the real way to fairly pay for road usage is some form of pay-per-mile. Someone that does 10,000 miles per year is doing more damage or causing more inconvenience than someone doing 5.000 miles per year. I now have a Niro EV and next to my previous Kuga it looks like a mini (although the new minis are getting ridiculously large for the name to be meaningful).
Back in the 90's my wife 'shared' a Fiesta with our son, but found that she had better vision on the road with her work Mk1 Nissan Prairie. She is 5' tall and had better views of all corners with it. Take away reversing cameras and how many of today's drivers could accurately and safely park a large saloon? SUV's is an all encompassing category because, for example, it includes my B Class ( 2wd but AMG line - bought for the trim level not the performance ), which I would consider a hatchback or small estate. The school run around here is very telling - we live opposite an alleyway that leads directly to the back of a school. The vehicles that park here ( wherever they bleedin' like, but that's another story ) are predominately medium to large SUV's, same size or larger than my B Class. Mostly it's one parent plus one child!! That is a bigger crime than owning an SUV!!! One of the few things that America has got right is their school bus system. We should have a version of that suitable for our roads and schools. If I were in power................. well firstly I wouldn't put myself up for a situation that had no winners, because that is what rule-making is ultimately about. As you so rightly demonstrated there is no 'one-size/one rule' that fits all. A rule that worked in inner cities is likely unsuitable for the suburbs or the countryside. And vice-versa. The same applies currently for ICE vehicles, there are situations where one is more appropriate than the other for the journeys involved. EV's that are more ecologically desirable may be less suitable. It's the old horses for courses scenario.
The SUV issue is multifaceted. They are thicker in their plate work because its a smaller car padded up. That gives thicker pillars making it harder to see what's going on around you. Longer and more square front making people less aware of where their front wheels are. Higher seating which often attracts older and lazier drivers, also usually form fitted deep seating inviting not to lean forward for looking even though that doesn't help anyways with the wide pillars. Its a lot of individually not important points that any one can overcome if they aren't useless twits, but we all know useless twit is far above the average driver, so yeah they stand out on the road because they more easily let people do stupid things than a tiny car. Its the White Van Man syndrome just covering so incredibly many of the cars on the roads.
6:39 - I've always thought these seemed oversized for what they are designed to do. Maybe I am wrong, but other pickups out there seem to have more storage on the back and without the unnecessary bulk of the car overall. Someone on our road had one and kept it parked on a narrow, blind bend leading to a cul-de-sac. It made getting past it quite difficult at times and dangerous when traffic was coming the other way. Other types of car have parked on the pavement in that spot over the years, but not blocked the road much if at all.
What grips me is people parking large SUVs in disabled or family spaces that have neither. They just think I've got a big expensive car and I'll stick it where I like, no Fs given.
Talking about the Nissan Juke, I think it's one of the stupidest cars on the road. Maximum footprint for minimum capacity. I think there should be an element of weight reflected in the duty level, maybe calculate the duty on a points system with points for weight and points for pollution.
EVs have heavy batteries so that's a tax on EVs, at a time we need to encourage them. Car tax is already related to pollution, until they bring it in on EVs.
@@cinnamondonkey2397 Who's sugesting that EVs shouldn't pay any duty at all? The reason that at present the duty is so low is that the government needs to incentivise electrification but when th drivers start to notice the advantages in convenience, air quality and noise levels, they won't go back.
I’ve got a tiguan allspace, primarily since it was one of the few vehicles that would fit my off-road wheelchair other than a van. I think I lot of the SUV hate started in the US with there giant trucks and suvs which make my tiguan look compact. I would rather the government introduced laws to ensure lower bonnet heights to ensure forward visibility and pedestrian protection technology. Next door neighbours got an SUV since he could no longer get in standard car, due to a bad hip. So lots of different reasons to get one.
I think what's often overlooked is that a decent SUV often makes for a really good family car, particularly if you have a few (more than two) kids. I think it also takes owning and living with one to understand the pros. I'm a petrolhead, love cars and always have, was never big on SUVs, didn't think I'd ever end up owning one, particularly a Hyundai (Santa Fe) but have to say hand on heart it's probably the best all round car I've had, perhaps ever. Bought several years old with a fair amount of mileage on it (so wasn't expensive), more equipment than you could ever need or want (it's a Premium SE), will do over 40mpg on a run driven half sensibly, on decent tyres handles OK and grips for days given what it is, goes very well as well given it's size and that it's only a 2.2 diesel. 7 seats so deals with the occasional kids party/trip very well! Best part is main dealer servicing is so reasonable, it still goes to the main dealer, in our ownership nothings gone wrong, flies through it's MOT every year and I have to say on days when the weather's not good (I live in an area where flooding is quite common) being in something with higher height and 4WD is reassuring. Its actually just a very nice thing to live with day to day. That said and done, the majority of them (the very new expensive ones) are bought for status/show and I don't really get that myself. The smaller front wheel drive vehicles you see around are utterly pointless.
A big point not mention in the video is that people tend to think SUVs are safer(they're not) and as they see bigger and bigger cars on the road they need a big car to feel as safe. That's what makes this cars socially acceptable and I doubt that vicious circle would change any time soon even if it was better for the roads to be populated with smaller cars. I always got the smallest one possible just to be more comfortable driving and parking (and save gas when I drove an ICE car) but now they're not even an option, a few examples: the smallest VW is the Polo, way bigger in its current iteration than the one from 2010(same with the fabia and ibiza), the smallest Ford is a Puma(whatever happened to the Ka or fiesta?), the smallest peugeut is the 208, huge when compare to the previous 208. The smallest citroen is the C3(remember the c1 or c2??), the smallest toyota is a suv aygo(just ridiculous). Companies don't even try to make smaller cars anymore
Agree, but it was market driven. There just wasn’t any profit to be made in small cars when they cost almost as much as a larger car to produce but people expect them to cost much less. As a result, most manufacturers just exited that market.
Road damage is proportional to weight^4, so add tax weight^4. eg £50 for 1 ton, £250 for 1.5, £800 for 2 ton, £1950 for 2.5 ton. Why not in addition to emissions?
@@NigelSavagery you mean the environmental damage from the one off mining of 800kg of battery materials that can be used to drive a car upwards of 300k miles? Or is it the damage from the fact that car batteries can be re-used for several more years for low power applications like stationary storage after it's life in a car? Actually maybe you're referring to the damage from batteries being 99% recyclable at the end of their life.
1. Vandalism under any circumstances is wrong and should be punished. 2. Most people assume far too much based on appearances. 3. Most people are hypocrites and should stop judging others as they would not want to be judged.
I'm getting on a bit. I'm tall and have back problems. A car with taller doors and higher seats is far easier to use daily. Why should I not use an SUV?
Emissions has always been a scam anyway - my 20yo estate reached £200/year - the replacement is heavier yet is in the old £30 bracket yet has far worse economy, so overall my yearly emissions are probably worse ironically for the same mileage. Had it been a lighter car it would have made sense so both weight and emissions should be factored in - then it would covers EVs as well… As for SUVs - I’ve had 2 Volvo estates now but they’re killing them off in favour of the SUV models - in 5 years estates will be a thing of the past 😢
Weight makes a lot of sense to use because lighter = more efficient when all other factors are equal. Heavy cars need stigmatising, the same way eating beef does. Their negative effects are huge when compared to the alternatives. Letting down tyres isn't the best way of doing it though.
I own a 2023 Land Rover Defender 90 as a work vehicle - it’s 4.323m long x 2.008m wide - I’ll take delivery of a new Mini Countryman S E next week and it is 4.433m long x 1.843m wide - so not much in it. The Countryman electric will replace a Mini Cooper S E Electric which has become too uncomfortable to get in and out of as I wait for a hip replacement op but it’s still huge fun once in it.
If I was in power I'd introduce 10% VAT for zero emissions vehicles, 30% for all other vehicles. Car tax would be abolished for petrol and diesel vehicles and put onto the fuel duty. For zero emissions vehicles I'd bring in a size based congestion charge for people who drive into cities and a pay as you go system to try to bring down the use of cars for school runs and driving around the corner for some shopping. You couldn't do this for people that live in villages as they don't have the amenities, my village has no bank or dentist for instance, so it would be an annual road tax similar to what we have now.
VED in two parts - half based on tailpipe emissions, half based on weight. That way you incentivise cars which are lower emissions, or lower weight or both.
What about a weight-based pay-per-mile system? If you can walk or cycle (assuming it's safe to do so and you don't end up as another statistic), to work for example, why do you drive? Another example would be a quick nip to the corner shop for some milk and teabags etc, most people choose to drive, why not walk or cycle?
Width is the problem Manufacturers are pushing wider cars so they can say better than the previous model, the government need to start taking action on the width of cars on narrow double parked streets, its getting silly
I want to be able to carry my bike on my car. I considered a cupra born but it literally can't carry a bike... can't put a boot rack on, or roof rack as it would invalidate the warranty. There are very few electric estates or at least ones that are affordable 2nd hand so I bought an etron as it gives loads of interior space decent ride and drive and is virtually the same size as every other electric car when I checked their measurements, especially width.
I think it is more about the height and how imposing they look, people who buy them feel safer or can bully other road users, everyone else is much more at risk especially pedestrians who are twice as likely to die if hit in the chest, and are dragged under the car rather than thrown up on to it. Children have no chance, and less visibility means more children being driven over by their own parents in their own drive. Following a high up vehicle is more dangerous, even if you leave the required distance, you can't see what is happing further down the road. Getting out at junctions is harder if a high vehicle is parked in the line of sight. You can get pick-ups that aren't "jacked up", so the excuse of using trailers and storing tools isn't valid unless you actually have to use it off road. Vans are just as dangerous but are accepted as they are used to carry larger loads, in the past, parking a large van on a residential road was frowned upon. Does the model Y have one of those bonnets that pops up at the back in a pedestrian accident?
A marginally smaller population can have the same environmental impact while still enjoying their comfortably large car instead of a marginally larger population driving penalty boxes Larger cars , SUV styles in particular with their enormous bonnets, have bigger crumple zones so why penalize their owners for improving safety? 2 cars hitting each other with big crumple zones is safer than 2 cars with tiny crumple zones like minivans. Their euroncap pedestrian ratings can still be good too! Their suspension can take more abuse from governments putting in ramps that cannot be taken well at the speed limit, instead of speed cameras or chicanes etc. Taller rear passengers don't need to have backs and legs in a stress position. They are easier to enter and exit. More speculatively, they are (I am guessing) better designed to protect against rust from road contaminants like government salting of the road such as being higher from the road and plastic wheel arches, and speculatively get less windscreen chips and filth and tire noise from being higher up while having better visibility over hill brows etc.
As u said, the SUV is there because that is what people want. Luckily I have the ability to buy whatever style vehicle I want which is now what my wife wants as we are now retired and down to using just 1 car. My wife loved her little Corsa but felt very vulnerable, years ago she loved her big Volvo estate car because she felt super safe and it was easy to drive. Now we are in an EV that some describe as an estate car and some say it’s an SUV, I don’t know it’s a bit between the 2, it’s a cross over, No, I’m told it is not that. It is what it is, it’s the car my wife feels safe in and likes to drive, nothing else matters.
Depends on a situation as well. I have a family of five and a dog. Plus, my sister-in-law in-law goes on a vacation with us as well, so I need a 7 seater, a big car. You mention weight, EVs will loose on that completely😉
Car parking spaces haven't changed since 1970s 52% cars are too wide . Estate cars are seen as required as space required. Right or wrongly SUV are considered bought by poses or for people showing off and not practical reasons and so have a more negative view . Slashing tyres is obviously wrong. The Bigger car trend will be a big issue cars don't fit in most houses garages , councils clamping down on parking on the curb , home parking needed for EV charging .
How much of the extra width is crash safety? Anecdotal but I've sat in a 2013 Nissan Leaf and a 2003 Nissan Micra. When I got into the Micra I noticed the doors are relatively thin, I'm not sure they'd do as well on a side impact pole test as the Leaf.
@@CampGareth probably nowhere near 1 cm width every 2 years worth. I'm glad you pointed out safety every 10cm in height increases fatalities to cyclists and pedestrians by 30% so the high SUV is bad on that front . A Chelsea tractor in its natural environment ( school run) can't legally go fast enough to cause serious injuries to its occupants but can cause serious injuries to others . SUV are typically built on truck chassis whereas estate vehicles are built on car chassis.
@@CampGareth Safety is definitely the cause of width increase in cars. The required crash protection regulations mean that older cars if sold as a new model just wouldn't be certified. If you remember back to the Austin Maxi ... a big car in the 1970s ... famously could fit a standard double mattress inside lying flat ... well, a Ford Fiesta over the past 10 or 15 years has a bigger footprint! Smaller outside but bigger inside. Much less protection in an accident for occupants and pedestrians.
Can you imagine being the poor bugger whose tyres are slashed, yet you own something quite unassuming like an Ignis? Based on the logic of some people, it'd be much safer to own something like an RS 4 Avant. It's about as daft as ULEZ/clean air zones allowing somebody in a V12 G-Wagen to drive for free but I'd get charged for my VED-exempt 2012 Peugeot 208 1.6 e-HDi if I so much as dip a toe into a zone.
The only issue I have with SUVs is that the taller you make the front, the more dangerous it is to pedestrians and cyclists. So if a person chooses an SUV over an equivalent hatch for the sole purpose of "safety", what they re doing is prioritising their own perceived safety (I don't believe they are actually any safer for the equivalent weight class) over the actual safety of people around them. That said, how do you tell? My in-laws need a hoist to get an electrified wheelchair into the back of their car. The only vehicles available for that are the larger sort of SUV, or the van derivations. The question of 2 cars vs one is an interesting one, and one I'm contemplating (again). I have a 40kWh Zoe, and it's fine for 98% of the journeys we make - mostly around town, to the shops etc. But it's a PITA for new journeys out of range where you want to explore, and it's impossible to get bikes or large model aeroplanes in it as well as 3 people. I could change the Zoe for something much bigger and more expensive and stay with 1 car. Or I could get a cheapass minivan for the things the Zoe isn't good at, and keep the Zoe forever. Running costs would go up, but there would be minimal depreciation, so it would cost the same over a few years. The ideal scenario would be a nice sensible EV estate, but there's only one of those and I have an irrational thing against MG.
I would be happy to drive a 'normal size' car. However, I am now at an age where my knees dictate the height of the car and SUV Style or indeed SUV make much more sense (currently driving a Hyundai Kona)
Having Lived BSUV and ASUV I saw the Devastating Effect and Cost When the F-150 in America took off and a Sporty/Shopping Trolley became the Commuter vehicle across the World. If you look at vehicles prior to that you see Low Aerodynamic Cars and even some SUV's eg: Honda Odysseys being Aerodynamic. You see the Honda after and see what happened to nearly every other Vehicle. They all had to have Higher Slab Sided Bodies to stop these SUV's from coming into your cabin. This now meant many Vehicles Upsized and became Less Aerodynamic. So far more Fuel use and Pollution with Diesels became popular to counter the decrease in Range in these Vehicles.
I think it's more than the footprint. If the suv is taller, people in other cars can't see through it and have to wait for suv to move before they can see traffic. If the suv is taller, it will have a bigger fuel / energy consumption, more environmental impact. If the suv is heavier, it will have a bigger fuel / energy consumption, more environmental impact. And more road ware. Taller car's is in my eyes more harmful to "normal" car's occupants - than safer for tall car's occupants. If a tall car is safer and more expensive - it may become a class gap where the rich get less injured and vice versa. A tall car can mean the metal goes higher before the glass starts. Take Toyota CHR as an example, glass starts so high even short people in the back of the car have trouble looking out. Just my theories. I would pick a car for economy (price), trailer hitch and boot space first. Then bonus if it have ground clearance, 230V V2L, 4WD. And I will not pay an extra £10k for the bonus features.
You can't physically fit 3 legally mandated car seats/booster seats in a "normal" sized modern car, due to safety impact cage requirements. Even two boosters renders most cars a 4 seater, so you're likely going to need an SUV for the school run (even though catchment areas exist meaning most people could walk). Small cars don't seem to get better economies than big cars either; a diesel C4 will get more than 60mpg, while a little petrol i10 might get up 40mpg - so you get a more comfortable ride, can easily fit in larger loads/more kids, can actually get a lot more miles from it, the engine is likely to last longer (not working as hard) and the car has better impact protection if you did hit something. Then turn this to the EV world - would you like a real 250 mile range (compared to a diesel at 600+ miles), or a 100 mile range in a small car - losing even more precious cabin space to the batteries required... and once you've chosen your small car, you're the one small car driver in a sea of SUV's. Even insurance favours big slow cars over hot-hatches. The initial/running costs are too much in favour of the choices we'd rather people didn't make.
It seems to me that car guys and car reviewers hate on SUV's but most everybody else love them. My Mrs is not interested in cars but loves her Ford Kuga cause it's tall and she sits higher up. She couldn't care less how well it handles or that it is a couple of mpg thirstier. My sister loves her Ford Kuga cause it's easier for her to get her elderly husband in and out.
Big high bonnets are far more dangerous to pedestrians. You are over 80% more likely to kill a child if you have a bonnet height over 115cm. The lower efficiency is pretty poor form in a climate emergency too but that is secondary to the immediate danger they pose to others.
because of their extra height SUV headlamps tend to blind you coming the other way, something needs to be done about that. I personally drive an estate (golf), better drive, better mpg, more aerodynamic and carries more as the load space is a better lay out
Ok for me… time to fess up! I love an suv, my dream car is a Range Rover (the big one, with the massive engine)….. do I need it, no! I have a Renault Zoe 50 (leave euro encap out please) and I love it. When I first reached out to you @evm you said Liverpool to London (in a Zoe 50) couldn’t be done… I did it more than once… do I still WANT the RR, no! I’d take an MG5! As it’s practical for me… yes I like the elevated driving position; but I’ll take the compromise
You are far more likely to die as a pedestrian or cyclist if you’re hit by an SUV. You go under the car and you’re hit in the middle where your organs are. If you get hit by a sedan or hatch you go over the bonnet and are hit in the legs.
I hate the fact that I drive an SUV (audi q4), but when I bought it, pretty much all quality family friendly EVs were SUVs. Presumably to fit the battery in.
They say the enyaq (same as the Q4) is 14cm higher than a octavia and this is around the same as the battery depth in the enclosure. I've also got a mondeo wagon. And I find the enyaq far better in every way. The boot is bigger the room in the back is a better shape its fits in a parking bay better. It's easier to get in and out of including the boot floor not being so low. I love it. It's like what an estate should be.
I went from a run of estate cars to a Rav4 (not the current shape) due to the available height and shape of the boot/rear space with seats folded down. I prefer estates, I think they look better, drive better (and I can reach the roof to wash them). The problem for me is that so many 'estates' now have a coupe-esque rear end that significantly restricts the loads that can be carried, especially boxy shapes. My circumstances changed and so I got rid of the Rav4 as I didn't need the carrying capacity any more but I still think estate cars need to go back to their roots and stop trying to be something they're not. I may well be out of step or even completely wrong but, it's what I think.
My annoyance with the SUV style vehicles is the bonnet shape reducing the visibility of the road in front of the vehicle. I have a similar annoyance with tiny rear windows. Makes anything but driving on a motorway a hazard for anyone around these vehicles.
VED is only emissions based in the first year of purchase now, after which it's £180 a year (or £570 if it was over £40,000 new) regardless of the pollution it causes. So I pay the same rate as a potentially 2 or even 2.5 tonne vehicle (electric or otherwise), despite my vehicle having a much smaller footprint and being less damaging to the road surface (my car weighs exactly 1 tonne).
I purely have one for the higher seat position for no other reason due to a very bad back. Its just easier for me to get in and out of. Otherwise I would have a saloon or an estate style.
60% of new registrations in 2023 were SUVs, up from 50% 2 years before. They're popular and here to stay. I can't use a Tesla 3, my knees bang the central screen. I tried an iPace but the seat is built for children. People like the upright driving position, they are easier to get into/out of if you have knee or joint issues, and easier to get child seats in/out. They are very practical.
I have a model Y I would sooner have a Model 3 if only it was a hatchback, but it's not. I had a Ford Mondeo and it was a hatchback and was just right. I could get four bikes in the car and had space for all our luggage to travel to France for holiday. I cannot get four bikes in a Model Y never mind a Model 3.
You honestly confused about the "taking more space up" point? Give youre head a wobble; its about drag, wider and taller especially when not evs are using a lot more resources every time you use it. There is a graph somewhere showing how engines have got.more efficient ober time, pretty much straight lovely think until suvs became popular and it tails off to a new worse trajectory
Height is an almost unlimited resource in the vast majority of road. Space, width, and length are far more important. Most bicycles are taller than a lot of cars and yet they take up almost no road space because they are so short and narrow…
Multiply the VED by the weight in tonnes and be done with it. SUVs can be small and light but there is little incentive to do so. If it actually makes sense to drive a fashion pickup to the shops there is a societal cost we all pay for so just bake that into the running costs
I really don't want to buy an SUV. Unfortunately, with a disabled mother who can't get in an out of a lower car, plus the need to carry a wheelchair, I have no choice.
For just carrying one person around…yes they deserve the stigma. They’re too big, too polluting and too dangerous for all around them. They never go off-road. They never fulfil their actual purpose.
I was surprised recently when I heard a Tesla Model Y described as an SUV. It is not substantially bigger than a Model 3 while being a bit taller in the roof. Any views on that? Maybe we need to move away from "bigger car" descriptions and instead describe them as taller, longer, wider, whatever.
If you see a Model 3 and Y next to each other they do look quite different in size. The 3 is at the tolerable width limit for the UK (in my opinion) and the Y just pushes beyond that and has the height increase too.
Two points. I think people like well spec’d and more luxury feeling vehicles, and bigger cars tend to be. In your example a Juke is better spec’d than a small 2 door hatch. Point 2. I agree with taxing by weight. But I’d add a modifier for its energy source, EVs having the lowest followed by, petrol, then being diesel. So 3 cars of similar weight, the ev is cheaper than the petrol, petrol cheaper than diesel. I agree with everything you said. Just let people be, and use tax to incentivise and drive society to where you want it to go.
They used to have smaller tall cars. Like honda jazz is pretty upright, Suzuki wagonR, Kia Venga. No one needs a Hyundai Tuscan because they struggle to get in and out things as big as a village if anything they will fall out and break their hip if old. Disability cars used to be Berlingo and kangoo vans used to see loads of them about
I've seen this comment a few times. I'm sure there are plenty of disabled people like my mum who can't raise their legs high enough to get in a tall car either. My mum is looking around on Motability at the moment and choices for a standard entry position, that she can sit on the seat and pull her legs in are getting harder to find. Partly designed but also safety standards. Side impact tests mean the gap between seats and sill is getting wider, making it hard for some.
EVs in general should be getting smaller not bigger. Putting bigger and bigger batteries inside to increase range is mad. We should be going for smaller, more efficient batteries in smaller and lighter cars.
Fashion is clearly a motivator in many peoples buying decisions and skews the decision toward buying the larger vehicle. The space carrying capacity argument doesn't really work in my view. For example the bulk of the seats in a Range Rover take up a substantial amount of the interior space. The original Range Rover had plasitic covered seats and rubber floor mats, you could wash it out with a hosepipe after a day off road in the mud would you do that with the current generation of Range Rover or other premium SUV? I think not. Equally the current generation of pick up truck seem illogical. The double cab I understand whether its being used to ferry the family around or taking your crew to the next job. It's the height and small load space that puzzles me. Lifting bags of cement into a modern pick up truck is clearly difficult, carrying 8 X 4 sheets of ply etc equally difficult. I can see from the manufacturers point of view itn is easier to sell an SUV than an estate car. I guess to if you are building EV's it is easier to put large capacity batteries and achieve greater range with a large SUV than a standard saloon/hatchback. I suspect the ratio of the weight of batteries to vehicle bodyweight favours the SUV. How do you change buying decisions? Changes to BIK would have an effect especially on corporate purchases as would increasing the 'luxury' car premium on cars costing more than £40K. Filling potholes might help as well!
I found the main problem that pushed me to a larger EV (eNV200 nissan) was the lack at that time of an affordable 4 seat that had a decent load carrying ability. What I really wanted was an estate with a tow bar. In the end I'd say it should be illegal to discriminate against somebody who is choosing to act legally but in a way you don't like. They should try to change the law by the usual channels.
I Drive a SUV to day (Nissan Aryia), not by my good will, but it was the EV that fit my long overboddy. IF i had a option like a Volvo 245-EV I drove that..
Like you not a fan of SUV's in general, but would consider one ie. Kia niro/skoda enyaq as have rapidly growing children/teenagers and rear passenger space is a priority right now. In answer to your question re. Tax, I would keep emissions tax for now to encourage lower emissions vehicle take up, especially EV's and make plans to change to weight based tax in 2030. The important thing would be to clearly anounce this planned changeover to give people time to adjust/prepare, both manufacturers and buyers.
On the one hand, generally speaking, the buying public is being offered what they want. On the other hand, it is what the majority of what the public want, and there a fewer and fewer options for the minority to choose something different. I will give an example of it not being as clear cut as it is stated in this video. Look at the trio of MG EVs. When the ZS EV SUV came out, everybody bought the ZS EV, because it was the sole EV offering. When the MG5 estate came out, many chose the MG5 over the ZS. And since the MG4 family-size hatchback has been out, it seems to me that the majority of MG's customers have chosen the MG4. Sure, the starting price of the MG4 is the lowest, but most people seem to be buying the longer range version, which is priced more on par with ZS and MG5. IMO, there's an untapped market for more affordable city cars rather than what's on offer, which is high-profit offerings. The problem as I see it is that since Covid manufacturers as a whole have abandoned the low-profit volume model for the high-profit model, irrespective of volume. Sure, there was higher inflation than had been typical for a year or two, and the prices of many pre-existing models went up about 10% a year. However, the cheapest car on sale in the UK pre-Covid was the Dacia Sandero, which then cost from 7,995 GBP. Now the very same model costs from 13,795 GBP, which is an almost 73% price increase. Pre-Covid, I had been thinking of stretching to buy my wife a new Sandero instead of a cheaper used car. Yes, used prices rose, but prices of used cars have now either corrected to what they would have been by now or seem in the process of doing so, depending on the model. The price of the Sandero on the other hand has had more prices increases than any other new car I can think of. IMO, the Sandero, while a decent enough car isn't a compelling new car bargain anymore. It doesn't even have compelling monthly payment deals. IMO, there is no better example of the abandonment of the volume model in favour of a high-profit model irrespective of volume than the Sandero and its almost 73% price increase. But we have also seen several of the largest manufacturers lowering quality as well as raising base prices and the cost of options. IMO, the UK sales success that is the Citroen Ami informs us that there's still demand for small, cheap, no-frills city cars, even when they're more expensive than when announced, and extremely compromised...left-hand drive, unstable/unsafe, only two seats, no boot, low range, and a top speed of only 45mph. Imagine how popular it would be if it was RHD, not easily rolled, had four seats, a boot, a minimum of a 100 miles range in winter, and a top speed of 75mph, like several Chinese-market offerings for the same money. Also imagine how less congested cities would be if for commuting and popping to the shops, etc, many people had the option to drive such a car rather than whatever other car/s they may have for times they need something larger or want something sportier.
SUV's are a necessity for some people. As someone else has said, they are easier for older or infirm people to get in and out of, not to mention parents with baby seats that fit much easier into the taller form factor of the SUV. However for most people they are less efficient and an estate is a better fit. But then I will always support the individual choice - just as I would support free speech!
Is it a environmental thing with SUV type cars or as a pedestrian walking out in front of a Teasla model 3 at 20 miles per hour is a tad better than a Ford F150 lightning and being hit at waist height or as a child head height. Just a thought.
Large cars are often not necessary. People have gotten used to far too big cars and think they need them. How do you make people realise that smaller, more efficient is possible?
I've had smaller cars in the past and got caught out not being able to fit things in. It was very frustrating. I see a car as a very practical things I've loved estate cars I tried to move away and it was the worst thing I ever did. I had to get a bail of hay I had a car seat and a push chair for my child.
One area which you didn't hit on is their increased frontal area, which results on an increased drag and therefore fuel consumption. The fact is that there are less small hatchbacks about the place and more SUVs. If the manufacturers & government policy put the same effort into reducing the fuel consumption to small, lighter cars with superior fuel consumption I think people would buy them, emissions would be lower and roads would have more space.
Small cars are not long enough to be aerodynamic. You need to add another metre on the back to reduce drag. Funny really. I had a van and now and skoda Enyaq i dont think either are very aerodynamic but i just tend to only go 56mph and i think this helps A lot.
@@chrishart8548 I'm talking about the frontal area, not the length. The smaller the frontal area (A) you have the smaller the drag: D = Cd x r x V^2/2 x A. Note that there is no length in this equation. SUVs tend to be more boxy with larger frontal areas, so high A and high Cd results in more drag. We can also go into rolling resistance if you like too. www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/VirtualAero/BottleRocket/airplane/drageq.html
I hate driving SUVs. They feel like a boat. One reason I am still resisting changing my rusty 16 years old golf is that I can't find a cheap long range used ev sedan. I can afford a used Kona ev but it is not like my golf on a twisty Yorkshire B road. Having said that, my mom is in her 80s and she struggle getting in and out the back seat of my golf. I am now seriously considering an SUV for that reason alone. I guess people with car seats have the same issue. Not everyone driving an SUV is an arrogant or have no clue how to enjoy driving. They are popular because they offer convenience to many people. As much as I hate them, I might end up buying one myself
This is not a real issue. A REAL issue however is the millions of daily commuters driving solo to work. We need better public transport so people feel confident to leave the car at home. I for one would leave the car at home more if trains and buses were cheaper and reliable.
Up until recently it was very easy to use government legislation to restrict people from straying towards the larger variant of a car, Tiguan v Golf example because the VED based on emissions meant the larger car had higher emissions which having higher emissions meant the manufacturers were penalised more if the didn’t sell more lower emissions vehicles, until now. Now that both variants are electric and both then cost the same fir owners to run and meets the requirements for manufacturers to reduce emissions across its range. So remove emissions as the requirements dm for both manufacturers and buyers to financially decide for us to buy and move the penalty of larger, longer and heavier variants to a weight tax or drag coefficient tax?
Saloon shaped cars are probably the most aerodynamic and economical. So I doubt the Jetta will be any less efficient than the golf and more efficient at speed.
A Model Y in the States would be thought as being a small car. A modern Golf is huge compared to an 80’s version. it’s all relative tbh. Plus SUV’s are just very popular and people like them. People slashing SUV car tyres are just vandals.
Are SUVs really the problem. Is it all about size? Do people have the same issue with HGVs? No the issue we have is the driver. Just all the knobs have moved from German saloons to big SUVs. So its irrelevant what car you drive, if you drive it like a d*ck. TBH the "hand gestures" gets used againt Uber drivers and DPD vans just as much as SUVs.
I'd like to see incentives for manufacturers to make small cars and for people to buy them, rather than taxing those who have to or choose bigger cars. K cars in Japan are a good example perhaps.
@chrishart8548 I guess my point is they aren't really being made anymore and not taken up either. So, if it was felt it would be beneficial to have more even smaller vehicles on the road then these need to be incentivised. That may well be the list price as well as tax.
The Bigger car trend is an issue that will get worse most home garages don't fit cars , council clamping down on parking on curbs home charging needed for EVs
That's nothing new though. We moved into our house in 2002, and had a T reg Focus, so not a big car. When it was in the garage, i had to fix a strip of wood to the floor, so I didn't hit the back wall, but wasn't too far forward that the garage door would hit the bonnet. I had to park so close the the wall that nobody could even open a near side door and I had to squeeze through a narrow door opening to get out of the drivers door. The garage is now a utility room and office.
Errm, merry Christmas to you too. I'm probably watching the wrong channel, as I drive a Jaguar I-Pace. When it comes to tax however, I think weight would be very wrong. There is one (and only one) absolutely perfect way of taxing vehicles. It is so amazingly simple, that it will never happen. It is this: Put all of the tax on the fuel. That simple. Lets explore what this means: You drive a small super-efficient car, which does 90 mpg - guess what, very little fuel, very little tax. You drive a huge 5L gas-guzzler, guess what, lots of fuel, lots of tax. You drive the same 5L gas-guzzler, and do twice as many miles as the guy above... Guess what, twice the, the miles, twice the fuel, twice the tax. Even better - you drive a decent sports car - with well above average power - you pay more fuel and therefore tax. But wait - someone else drives that same car, but drives it like they stole it - their fuel bill is higher, and so is their tax. It doesn't matter Golf Estate vs Tiguan vs any-other-car. Less efficient = More fuel = more tax. We all know electric cars are going to be taxed. It needs to happen. What we need to avoid however is making my wifes' Diesel Golf cost £100 in "road fund licence tax", when it only does about 1400 miles per year. It is a perfectly good car, with years of like left in it. Ecologically it would be worse for the environment if we scrapped it and another car got built. Even if that was a Seat Mii.
Do you think you get a choice? Car manufacturing has been done for more than 100 years… Car manufacturers using over 100 years of data and up to 70% of turn over to advertisers to you… Now add in share holders and profits… QED you get conditioned to buy an SUV and the car manufacturers share holders are very happy.
Yes tax heavier vehicles. But the Government isn’t doing that particularly. Indeed the government appears hostile to climate policies. I think you need upsetting / jarring actions - like tyre deflators - and seemingly silly protests - to urge faster change. You will have seen the fault line in the minds of those friends you know would be probably be better off with an ev (or a heatpump) who seem to know whyEVs won’t work - despite you having driven 60,000 miles in one and them none at all. Theirs is not a logical dispassionate objection. It’s an emotional irrational one. The protest actions seem to me to an attempt to dislodge such people from their habits and recklessness. Sometimes business as usual is reckless. It is an awful crisis. It is an emergency. We aren’t changing things quickly enough.
We ended up with one because im not small so my road bike even with the front wheel off needs a long car, looked at the megane and tbh that boot is BS too short (deep isnt helpful)
People are buying SUVs because that's all the manufacturers advertised. Ford have stopped making the Fiesta but are happy to sell you a Puma for 5k more. I think cars should be taxed on their weight as smaller lighter cars should be more efficient.
While the footprint and weight of your everyday vehicle may be justified by its use case, those who drive very large high emission gas guzzlers in congested city streets are the embodiment of irresponsible selfish prats. There can be no justification for the use of such toxic, destructive status symbols in our congested cities.
My wife has an SLK. To avoid door dings, we often find an end parking space and park way over to one side. Many times we come back to find a 3 row SUV or full size pickup parked next to us, wheels right on the dividing line. One way to see this: morons! Another way: they found a nice spot with a little extra room. In 9 years, no door dings so maybe they're not morons. Safety standards have caused most vehicles to grow taller anyways, and child seats make SUVs a good choice.
